Ben DeGrow, Education Policy Analyst, Independence Institute, 303-279-6536, ben@i2i.org

Remarks to Long-Term Fiscal Stability Commission (July 29, 2009)

I’d like to thank the Commission for the opportunity to provide a few remarks. Inprevious sessions you have heard from various groups that have painted a dire pictureof Colorado’s standing in regards to funding for public schools. But there’s more to thestory about this area that rightly makes up a large share of the state budget.First, I will concede that Colorado spends less dollars per pupil than many other states,and that over recent years our state has not increased per-pupil spending as much asthe national average. Depending on how you measure, Colorado’s per-pupilexpenditures from 1992 to 2007 have grown somewhere between 15 and 25 percent inreal, inflation-adjusted dollars. The national average? Between 36 and 42 percent duringthe same time span. CDE reports that Colorado schools received more than $8 billion, or$10,000 per student, in 2007-08. More than 42 percent of that amount comes from statetax revenue. As a result, again depending on your sources, Colorado ranks either about30

or about 40

in spending.An adequate level of school funding certainly is needed to meet the shared goals ofpublic education. But as Colorado Commissioner of Education Dwight Jones aptly wasquoted in yesterday’s

Denver Post

: “I am not one of those who says immediately pourmore money on it. I think we first have to evaluate what resources we have and howwe've been spending those dollars.”The problem is we don’t know how much is adequate. And until we do, the gamepitting the education establishment lobby versus the taxpayer will yield no winner.Seeking to figure out the “right amount” of school funding, so-called adequacy studiesrely either on the “professional judgment” of self-interested school administrators, oron a “successful schools” model that has to overlook the fact that many schools makegreater academic strides with less funds. The truth is: with the current system, wesimply don’t know.

Page 1

Ben DeGrow, Education Policy Analyst, Independence Institute, 303-279-6536, ben@i2i.org

For example, does Florida spend an adequate amount? Florida—which like Coloradospends less than the national average—has followed a comprehensive reform planbased on broad parental choice, rigorous accountability, and scientifically-basedcurriculum. As a result they have made major advances in student achievement, asmeasured by the gold standard NAEP test. A decade ago, only half of Florida’s fourth-graders demonstrated basic reading skills. It since has climbed to 70 percent. Today, thestate’s African-American kids are fourth-highest among their peer group nationwide,and its Hispanic kids outperform all students regardless of ethnicity in 14 other states.Hard times provide opportunities to rebuild systems that aren’t working as they ought,and school finance is a prime candidate. The issue for Colorado and most states is not somuch inadequacy as inadequate school finance systems. Recently, the University ofWashington’s Center on Reinventing Public Education—or, CRPE—concluded a six-year, comprehensive national study of our nation’s school finance system. The work of40 top scholars concluded the way we fund schools has malfunctioned like an outdatedcomputer overloaded with too many applications that it cannot process. Anyone whohas ever encountered the “blue screen of death” gets the picture. We need to turn offthe autopilot switch that perpetually funds inefficient programs and practices.Here is one example from a recent CRPE study shows that Colorado schools misspendnearly 2 percent of their total budgets—or about $140 million—on “master’s bumps,”rewards for teachers who earn a masters degree. Research shows zero correlationbetween the accumulation of advanced degrees and classroom success.We need to restructure incentives so the energy of well-intentioned people who workhard in the system and the resources of taxpayers are directed into areas that effectivelymove the bottom line: student learning. We need to attach funding to students, rather

Page 2

Ben DeGrow, Education Policy Analyst, Independence Institute, 303-279-6536, ben@i2i.org

than programs. We need a system built on innovation and continuous improvement,not on compliance with regulatory schemes.The transition to a more efficient and comprehensible system of school funding will notbe easy, but the achievable goal makes it worthwhile. And existing technology makes itincreasingly practical:-We can and should seek to transform the delivery of instruction into a less costly,less labor-intensive enterprise.-We can and should advance policies that make the detailed inputs of schoolspending and the detailed outputs of school performance more transparent to thetaxpaying public.-We can and should incentivize local education agencies to pursue more cost-saving strategies, including sharing services and competitive contracting of non-instructional functions.Another cost-cutting measure worthy of important consideration would be the creationof a broad-based tuition tax credit program. Giving a modest tax credit-fundedscholarship would empower students and families with another option to meet theireducational needs, while public schools would retain excess resources to meet the needsof children who opt to stay.Yes, it is not within your charge to redesign the school funding system. However, theCommission can recommend that policy makers give priority to vital systemic K-12education reforms that promote efficiency and transparency as a means to advance thequality of public education while promoting Long-Term Fiscal Stability.Difficult times provide Colorado with a momentous opportunity. Let’s choose to find asmarter way to pay for schools before we scramble to pour more money on them.Taxpayers deserve the good faith, and students deserve the opportunity. Thank you.

Page 3